This chapter examines the instrumental case for collateral legal consequences (CLCs). CLCs are commonly defended as risk-reductive measures. The chapter proposes several considerations relevant to determining whether and when particular measures are justified on risk-reduction grounds: Restrictions should effectively serve a morally compelling interest, they should not generate offsetting negative consequences, and they should represent the least burdensome alternative. The chapter contends that some CLCs may be permissible according to these criteria, but only in a very limited range of cases. Also, the state will be obliged to make provisions to mitigate the effects of such measures on offenders’ abilities to build legitimate lives for themselves.
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.